Modelling and Vibration Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science

( Peer-Reviewed, Open Access, Fully Refereed International Journal )
Volume:03/Issue:08/August-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com
MODELLING AND VIBRATION ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED

CONCRETE BRIDGE
Shivanandan T N*1, Meghashree M*2
*1PG Student, Department Of Civil Engineering, Dayananda Sagar College Depart Of Engineering,
Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
*2Assistant Professor, Department Of Civil Engineering Dayananda Sagar College Of Engineering,
Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
ABSTRACT
As catastrophic bridge collapse accidents not only cause significant loss of property, but also have a severe
social impact. Therefore, the structural health monitoring of bridges for damage detection by vibration analysis
gets more attention. Reinforced concrete bridges are the most common and extended structures present in the
worldwide. These structures are often characterized by Piers, Abutments, deck slabs. This paper looks on the
work of modelling and analysis of bridge in STAAD.Pro software, and the specific bridge model is taken of a
particular span. It is subjected to vary Young’s modulus (E) in the mid span of bridge deck slab to induce
damage in order to obtain maximum bending moment, as the structural strength reduces. From the analysis
Mu/bd2 values from SP 16 code is used to identify the damage on the bridge deck slab, then natural frequency of
the bridge, mode shapes, variation of the deflection and node displacements of bridge deck slab under the
action of static and dynamic load at different aspect ratios with original design parameters and at failure is
carried out in this project.
Keywords: Natural Frequency, Mode Shapes, Maximum Bending Moment, Deflection, Node Displacement.
I. INTRODUCTION
Roads are the lifelines of contemporary transport and bridges are the foremost vital elements of transportation
systems. They are prone to failure if their structural deficiencies are remain unidentified. Due to aging of
existing bridges and the increasing traffic loads, monitoring of bridge deck slab during service time has become
more important than ever. The structural health monitoring of bridge refers to the process of implementing a
damage detection and characterization strategy. There is a need for Structural health monitoring techniques to
supplement visual inspections as more bridges are in need of in-depth assessments and ongoing monitoring to
ensure they are still fit for purpose. Vibration monitoring is a useful evaluation tool in the development of a
non-destructive damage identification technique, and relies on the fact that occurrence of damage in a
structural system leads to changes in its dynamic properties. The dynamic response of bridges subjected to
moving loads has long been an interesting topic in the field of civil engineering. The load-bearing capacity of a
bridge and its structural behavior under traffic can be evaluated using well-established modelling. Among the
tools available today for structural investigation, dynamic techniques play an important role from several
points of view. Particularly, by measuring the structural response, they allow us to identify the main
parameters governing the dynamic behavior of a bridge, namely natural frequencies, mode shapes and
damping factors. Modal analysis, usually based on finite element method, is commonly used to determine the
vibration characteristics, such as natural frequencies and associated mode shapes of a structure
II. METHODOLOGY
Modeling methodology:
 First Assessment of Load on the bridge as per IRC-6-2017 section Ⅱ specifications.
 Creating model of the bridge using STAAD.pro software.
Material Properties and Load Modelling:
Properties for Deck slab concrete is taken as E= 25 x 10 6 kN/m2; µ= 0.17; ρ= 25 kN/m3. The dead load contains
of self-weight of the whole structure. This is accounted through geometrical properties of sections and unit
weight of materials used. The primary live load on Highway Bridge is of the cars moving on it. Indian Roads
Congress (IRC) recommends different kinds of widespread hypothetical vehicular loading systems in IRC
www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science
[416]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
6:2017, for which a bridge is to be designed. The vehicular live load consists of a set wheel loads which can be
distributed over small areas of contacts of wheels and form patch loads and dealt with as concentrated loads
acting at centres of contact areas. This will acquire the maximum response resultants for the layout, different
positions of every type of loading system as per IRC 6:2017 is tried at the bridge deck. The load is moved
longitudinally and transversely in small steps to occupy a large number of various positions on the deck. The
largest force reaction is obtained at each node. As per IRC 6:2017 , 2 lane of class A or one lane of class 70R
should be considered to get most response under hypothetical vehicular loading systems.
Analysis methodology:
 Analyzing the model for static and dynamic loading (vibration analysis) for different aspect ratios.
 STATIC ANALYSIS
 Typical simply supported two- lane bridge study cases are considered in this study. Aspect ratios of 0.50,
1.01, 1.52, and 2.03 are considered as parameters of deck slab of 0.7m thickness. The aspect ratios
considered for analysis are shown in Table.
Table 1: Shows the Aspect Ratios along the bridge.
Length in m (L) Breadth in m (B) Aspect ratio (L/B)
0 8.45 0
4.3 8.45 0.50
8.6 8.45 1.01
12.9 8.45 1.52
17.2 8.45 2.03
 By varying the material property of the structure such as young’s modulus of concrete (E) in percentages
of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25in the bridge deck slab imposing/inducing damage to the structure and locating it.
 Using maximum bending moment getting from the bridge model in the Mu/bd2 value from SP 16 code
analyzing the model for damage.
 Variation of mode shapes, fundamental frequencies, node displacements are to be found out.
III. MODELING AND ANALYSIS
Modelling using STAAD.pro V8i SS6 Software
STAAD pro is a robust program that can profoundly intensify analytical and design abilities of engineer’s for
structures. Functioning of simple or complex structures under stationary or dynamic states can be checked
using STAAD pro. Instinctive and unified traits make implementations of any complicated practical problem to
implement. For this bridge, plate modelling has been considered and STAAD.Pro has been used for further
process.
Structural details
Parameters
1. RCC Deck Slab of Span 8.6m(Each slab)
2. Length of abutment/ width of the bridge 8.45m
3. Height of the bridge above nala bed projection 4.0m
4. Thickness of the abutment 0.5m
5. Thickness of the deck slab 0.7m
6. Live load considered for design is as per IRC 70R, and Class A-2 lane
Dead load=636.70 KN (from SP 20 2002 Plate No- 7.10 Page No 162)
Live load=635.00 KN
7. Grade of concrete M-30
8. Grade of steel Fe 500

[417]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Load estimation
Dead load
It includes self-weight, weights of finishes. A self-weight multiplier of one which means to add the entire self-
weight of the building in the load case.
Self-weight of the structural members will be considered as given in the below Table 1.2 on the basis of IS: 875
(Part 1)-1987 code.
Table 2: Density of materials
Self-weight of plain concrete 24kN/m3
Density of RCC 25kN/m3
Self-weight of un compacted soil 20kN/m3
Density of steel 78.50kN/m3
Live load
Live load comprises of those loads whose position or magnitude or both may change, the live load on deck slab
is taken as vehicular load. Live load includes 70R Wheeled, 70R Tracked, 40T Bogie loads, out of which Class A-
2 lane loads are placed on carriageway for analysis. These live loads are placed on carriageway for the analysis,
based on carriageway width and number of lanes.
Live load considered for design is as per IRC Class A-2 lane. This loading is normally adopted on all roads on
which permanent bridges and culverts are constructed. This type of loadings are considered for bridges having
Carriageway width 5.3m and above but less than 9.6m.
Figure 1: shows the vehicular load considered as per IRC 6 2017

Frequency calculation load
For frequency calculation, self-weight in X, Y, Z directions is assigned.
Pressure on full plate is calculated and assigned on the deck slab as plate load in Global X, Y, and Z Directions.
Pressure on the full plate=total axle load on the deck slab/cross sectional area of the deck slab
Pressure on the full plate= (27+27+114+114+68+68+68)/ (17.2x8.45)
Pressure on the full plate=486/145.34
Pressure on the full plate=3.34kN/m2
Structural frame models
The plan and the 3D view of the model developed using STAAD.Pro software is shown in Fig.
Figure 2: Reinforced concrete bridge grid model

[418]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Figure 3: 3D view of Reinforced Concrete Bridge
Figure 4: Bridge under the action of static load/ self-weight.

Bridge model under the dynamic loading. i.e., under the action of vehicular load at different aspect
ratios.
Figure 5: Bridge model under the dynamic loading at the aspect ratio of 0
Figure 6: Bridge model under the dynamic loading at the aspect ratio 0.50
Figure 7: Bridge model under the dynamic loading at the aspect ratio of 1.01

[419]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Figure 10: Bridge model under the natural frequency calculation load
ANALYSIS
Pre analysis checks Before analysing the model, it should be checked to know whether there is any error. Then
the model should be rectified until no errors come.
Post analysis checks After a model is analysed by STAAD.Pro it is very important to check the basic
characteristics of the model.
The Maximum Bending moment in the deck slab under original design properties is noted and M u/bd2 from SP
16 code provision for percentage of steel in tension and compression is considered.
The associated mode shapes, frequencies, and node displacement in the deck slab with the original design
properties are noted/considered for analysis.
For inducing damage/failure on the bridge deck slab, the Young’s modulus of concrete (E is reduced in
percentages of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25,.etc. ) is changed in the mid span section of the bridge deck slab.
Under reduced Young’s modulus of concrete (E is reduced in percentages of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25,.etc. ) in the deck
slab of the bridge and due to change in strength property of concrete, the change in the maximum bending
moment in the deck slab at each percentage of reduction of young’s modulus of concrete(E) is noted and
considered for analysis.
The failure occurring in the deck slab of the bridge at particular percentage of reduced young’s modulus of
concrete (E) is identified by comparing Mu/bd2 value of the deck slab under original design properties with that
of the Mu/bd2 value of the deck slab under reduced Young’s modulus of concrete (E is reduced in percentages of
5, 10, 15, 20, 25,.etc. ) in the deck slab of the bridge.
Then, the associated mode shapes, frequencies, and node displacement in the deck slab with the reduced
Young’s modulus of concrete (E is reduced in percentages of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25,.etc. ) in the deck slab of the bridge

[420]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
is compared with that of the associated mode shapes, frequencies, and node displacement in the deck slab with
the original design properties.
For analysis part only part of the bridge deck slab of dimensions, length (L) 17.2m and breadth (B) 8.45m is
considered under 2 lane class A type of loading.
The maximum bending moment, mode shapes and their associated frequencies of the bridge deck slab
under the original properties
Table 3: shows the maximum bending moment in the bridge at original design properties.
Plate number MX kNm/m
559 307.495
223 302.67
604 -301.0799
585 279.291
239 277.415
607 -264.874
249 -264.345
240 257.426
596 256.923
258 253.946
252 236.601
276 236.558
Maximum bending moment in the bridge is 307.495kN-m/m.
Mu =307.495x8.6=2644.457 kN-m
Mu/bd2obtained=( 2644.457x106) / (1000x6502)
=6.26 N/mm2
From SP 16 for M 25 grade concrete and Fe 415 grade steel, for 2 way reinforced deck slab
For d1/d=(50/650)=0.0769 say 0.10
Where,
d1=cover=50mm
d= effective depth=700-50=650mm
For Pt=2.102 and Pc=0.961,
Mu/bd2=6.4 N/mm2> Mu/bd2obtained , hence safe.

[421]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Figures 11: shows the modeshapes of the bridge under the action of dynamic load.
Table 4: shows the frequency of the mode shapes associated with it.
Frequency(Hz) Period (seconds)
13.510 0.074
18.265 0.055
19.938 0.050
23.351 0.043
42.434 0.024
45
40
Frequency(Hertz)
35
30
25
20 Frequency
15
10
5
0
0.07402 0.05475 0.05015 0.04282 0.02357
Time(Sec)
Figure 12: shows the variation of the frequency v/s time graph at 0% 0f E reduction

[422]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Analysis of the bridge under varied/ reduced young’s modulus (E) of the concrete
Checking for Mu/bd2 value under 25% of E reduced in the deck slab of bridge.
Table 5: shows the maximum bending moment in the bridge at 25% of E reduction
Plate MX kNm/m
240 -316.295
565 308.078
561 303.441
563 279.967
258 -279.106
545 -273.792
587 258.097
567 257.414
588 254.525
Maximum bending moment in the bridge is 316.295kN-m/m.
Mu =316.295x8.6=2720.137 kN-m
Mu/bd2obtained=( 2720.137x106) / (1000x6502)
=6.4382 N/mm2
From SP 16 for M 25 grade concrete and Fe 415 grade steel, for 2 way reinforced deck slab
For d1/d=(50/650)=0.0769 say 0.10
Where,
d1=cover=50mm
d= effective depth=700-50=650mm
For Pt=2.102 and Pc=0.961,
Mu/bd2=6.4 N/mm2< Mu/bd2obtained , hence the bridge is failing at 25% of E reduction
Table 6: shows the frequency associated with the mode shapes at the 25% 0f E reduction
Frequency (Hz) Period (Seconds)
12.929 0.07735
17.772 0.05627
19.592 0.05104
23.03 0.04342
41.169 0.02429
Frequency (Hz) vs Period (sec)

50
40
30
20 Frequency(Hz)
10 vs Period(sec)
0
Figure 13: shows the variation of the frequency v/s time graph at 25% 0f E reduction
[423]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Table 7: Deflection in the bridge deck slab before and after failing
Deflection values in the bridge under 0% and 25% E reduction
Node Y-Trans mm Absolute mm Node Y-Trans mm Absolute mm
496 -2.613 2.613 496 -2.623 2.623
498 -2.586 2.586 498 -2.595 2.595
494 -2.505 2.505 494 -2.516 2.516
500 -2.469 2.469 500 -2.477 2.477
497 -2.289 2.289 193 -2.476 2.476
492 -2.276 2.276 191 -2.471 2.471
499 -2.274 2.274 195 -2.34 2.34
193 -2.209 2.209 189 -2.329 2.329
495 -2.201 2.201 497 -2.299 2.299
191 -2.198 2.198 492 -2.286 2.286
502 -2.179 2.179 499 -2.283 2.283
501 -2.151 2.151 495 -2.211 2.211
195 -2.098 2.098 502 -2.187 2.187
189 -2.071 2.071 501 -2.159 2.159
493 -2.023 2.023 192 -2.154 2.154
521 -2.003 2.003 194 -2.146 2.146
490 -1.995 1.995 197 -2.119 2.119
522 -1.988 1.988 187 -2.118 2.118
520 -1.932 1.932 190 -2.06 2.06
Variation of Node displacement of plate node number 240 in the bridge at 0% and 25% E reduction
under the action of loads.
At 0% of E reduction (Table 8)
Table 8: shows the node displacement values under static and dynamic loads at different aspect ratios
LOAD CASE Horizontal x Vertical y Horizontal z Resultant
1 SELF WEIGHT 0 -0.329 -0.002 0.329
2 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #2 -0.001 -0.567 -0.011 0.567

3 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #3 0.004 -0.041 -0.013 0.043
4 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #4 0.006 0.278 -0.007 0.278
6 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #6 0 0 0 0
7 FREQUENCY CALCULATION
LOAD 0.052 0.35 0.123 0.375
At 25% of E reduction (Table 9)

[424]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
Table 9: shows the node displacement values under static load and dynamic loads at different aspect ratios
LOAD CASE Horizontal x Vertical y Horizontal z Resultant

1 SELF WEIGHT 0 -0.372 -0.002 0.372
2 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #2 -0.002 -0.625 -0.011 0.625
3 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #3 0.004 -0.048 -0.013 0.05
6 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #6 0 0 0 0
7 FREQUENCY CALCULATION LOAD 0.055 0.395 0.123 0.418
Table 10: Variation of the node displacement due to static load and dynamic loads at different aspect ratios
LOAD CASE Resultant at 0% Resultant at 25% difference in %

1 SELF WEIGHT 0.329 0.372 13.06
2 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #2 0.567 0.625 10.23
6 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #6 0 0 0
7 FREQUENCY CALCULATION LOAD 0.375 0.418 11.46
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1. The model of the solid slab bridge is done using STAAD.pro V8i (select series 6) software as per the design
details are available. The bridge in this project is analysed under the live load of class A 2-lane load. These
live loads are placed on carriageway for the analysis, based on carriageway width and number of lanes.
2. After the model is checked for the error free, the M u/bd2 value= 6.4 N/mm2 is considered as reference, for
two way reinforced deck slab from SP 16 code for the percentage of steel in the deck slab in tension and
compression.(i.e., for Pt=2.102 and Pc=0.961)
3. A trial and error method is applied to induce damage/failure on the bridge deck slab by changing/reducing
the young’s modulus of the concrete (E) in percentages of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 in the mid-span section of the
deck slab. Then, the obtained Mu/bd2 value of 6.261 N/mm2, 6.263 N/mm2, 6.3 N/mm2,6.4382 N/mm2 at
5,10,15,20,25 percentage of E reduction respectively are compared to Mu/bd2 reference value obtained
from SP 16 code.
4. It is noticed that the bridge deck slab fails at the 25% of E reduction in the deck slab of bridge. The M u/bd2
obtained at 25% of E reduction is greater than the reference value of the Mu/bd2.
i.e. (Mu/bd2 obtained =6.4382 N/mm2) > (reference value of the Mu/bd2=6.4 N/mm2)
5. At the failure it is observed that there is slight reduction in the frequency of vibration with respect to the
time period and there is significant increase in the deflection and node displacement values.
6. The maximum deflection in the bridge under original design parameters is 2.613mm, 2.586mm, 2.505mm…,
at the nodes 496, 498, 494 .., respectively. And the change in deflection values at the 25% of E reduction in
the bridge deck slab is 2.623, 2.595, 2.516.., respectively.
7. After the failure occurs at the node number 240, the difference in the node displacement value of the node
number 240 before and after failing under the action of static load is 13.06%. While, the difference in node
displacement value under the dynamic/live load at the aspect ratios 0, 0.50, 1.01, 1.52, 2.03 is 10.23, 16.27,
5.035, 4.6875, 0 percentages(%) respectively.
8. The frequency of vibration associated with the mode shapes of the bridge under original design parameters
is 13.510, 18.265, 19.938, 23.351, 42.434 Hz respectively. While, the frequency associated with the mode
[425]
e-ISSN: 2582-5208
shapes of the bridge under failure or at 25% of E reduction in the bridge deck slab is 12.929, 17.772, 19.592,
23.03, 41.169 Hz respectively. It is noticed that there is a slight variation in the frequency of vibration at
failure.
V. CONCLUSION
1. In the present study the bridge investigated is solid slab bridge with abutment type piers, under the self-
weight and live load considered of class A 2-lane type of vehicular load as per IRC: 6-2017 section Ⅱ, this
code book mainly deals with loads and load combinations for bridges. It specifies the different types of loads
and their combinations to be considered in the design of a bridge.
2. In this project damage/ failure identification in the bridge deck slab is done by M u/bd2 values getting for
maximum bending moment in the deck slab from SP 16 code.
3. The difference in the node displacement value of the node number 240 before and after failing under the
action of static load is 13.06%. While, the difference in node displacement value under the dynamic/live
load at the aspect ratios 0, 0.50, 1.01, 1.52, 2.03 is 10.23, 16.27, 5.035, 4.6875, 0 percentages(%)
respectively.
4. The study can be extended to other types of RCC and PSC bridges with different live loads, and with other
combination of loads such as braking loads, impact loads, temperature loads and earth pressure as per IRC:
6-2017 section Ⅱ code.
5. The study can also be done on bridge piers and abutments by formulating appropriate methodology.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] D. H. K. B. K. Han, “Simple Method of Vibration Analysis of Three Span Continuous Reinforced Concrete
Bridge with Elastic Intermediate Support.pdf,” pp. 23–28, 2004.
[2] N. H. Hamid, M. S. Jaafar, and N. S. U. Othman, “Analysis of Multi-column Pier of Bridge Using STAAD.Pro
Under Static and Dynamic Loading,” InCIEC 2015, pp. 169–182, 2016, doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-0155-
0.
[3] P. K. C. T. K. D. C. S. Surana, “Vibration of continuous bridges under moving vehicles,” J. Sound Vib., pp.
619–632, 1994.
[4] T. J. Memory, D. P. Thambiratnam, and G. H. Brameld, “Free vibration analysis of bridges,” Eng. Struct.,
vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 705–713, 1995, doi: 10.1016/0141-0296(95)00037-8.
[5] F. T. K. Au, Y. S. Cheng, and Y. K. Cheung, “Vibration analysis of bridges under moving vehicles and
trains: an overview,” Prog. Struct. Eng. Mater., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 299–304, 2001, doi: 10.1002/pse.89.
[6] J. Maeck and G. De Roeck, “Damage assessment using vibration analysis on the Z24-bridge,” Mech. Syst.
Signal Process., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 133–142, 2003, doi: 10.1006/mssp.2002.1550.
[7] M. Roopa, H. Venugopal, and T. G. Nischay, “Static and Vibration Analysis of Bridge Deck Slabs.”
[8] P. S. Bhil, “Vibration Analysis of Deck Slab Bridge,” Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol., vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 667–670,
2015.
[9] Y. S. Cheng, F. T. K. Au, and Y. K. Cheung, “Vibration of railway bridges under a moving train by using
bridge-track-vehicle element,” Eng. Struct., vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 1597–1606, 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0141-
0296(01)00058-X.
[10] Z. Zhu, L. Wang, Z. Yu, W. Gong, and Y. Bai, “Non-Stationary Random Vibration Analysis of Railway
Bridges under Moving Heavy-Haul Trains,” Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1–21, 2018, doi:
10.1142/S0219455418500359.
IRC CODES
[11] IRC 6-2017 - Section Ⅱ loads and load combinations

[12] IRC 112-2019 – Code of practice for concrete road bridges.
[13] SP 16 – Design aids for Reinforced concrete to IS456.

[426]

Modelling and Vibration Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Modelling and Vibration Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modelling and Vibration Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

e-ISSN: 2582-5208

International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science

MODELLING AND VIBRATION ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED

4.3 8.45 0.50

8.6 8.45 1.01

12.9 8.45 1.52

17.2 8.45 2.03

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

Figure 1: shows the vehicular load considered as per IRC 6 2017

Figure 2: Reinforced concrete bridge grid model

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

Figure 3: 3D view of Reinforced Concrete Bridge

Figure 4: Bridge under the action of static load/ self-weight.

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

Frequency (Hz) vs Period (sec)

2 LOAD GENERATION, LOAD #2 -0.001 -0.567 -0.011 0.567

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

LOAD CASE Horizontal x Vertical y Horizontal z Resultant

LOAD CASE Resultant at 0% Resultant at 25% difference in %

[11] IRC 6-2017 - Section Ⅱ loads and load combinations

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

You might also like